About your Search

20130422
20130422
STATION
MSNBCW 5
CNNW 4
CNBC 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 19
Search Results 0 to 18 of about 19 (some duplicates have been removed)
're hearing, it was that lowest threshold. >> now, senator lindsey graham is saying there was misspelled paperwork in the form of misspelled names. which resulted in a failure to follow up these individuals. is it really possible that a simple spelling error may have caused a breakdown in the communication here? >> i -- short answer, i don't know in this case. however, i will tell you that transliteration, in particular from arabic, for example, translated to english, vice versa, at times can cause con nu confusion to the system but not a breakdown. >> the relationship between intelligence agencies here and russia and perhaps a lack of cooperation between the two. >> well, at least through my time in government, with most allied countries and even nominal allies, at the law enforcement level and intel, usually quite good. it's kind of a comrade in arms type approach. there is, however, though, martin, sometimes there are political considerations. we don't know if we have that here. but in this case, if there was something really compelling on the russian side, it brings up the question,
heard in that report from mike emanuel, lindsey graham, republican from south carolina said let's go quickly. essentially we have terrorists in our midst. we might. let's find out who all of these 11 million people who have come here illegally are but does anyone think that terrorists will step to the front of the line to register? >> you know, look. this is the broader question of will, will this immigration reform bill make us safer? i think gram gram overstated the argument, you're right. -- lindsey graham. you're a terrorist attempting to be member of a sleeper cell it is unclear you will necessarily surface as this proposed new law requires you to do and make yourself known to authorities. on the other hand here is the ironic thing. in a way the bill could make us safer from this perspective. the two brothers came here when their family came here. their family came here look like they had other families already here. the parents of two the brothers had a brother, their uncle already here in the united states and they therefore appear like they might have come here, they got extr
cain, lindsey graham, they are suggesting. >> that could take him out of the american criminal justice system and put him into some other kind of system. it's not quite clear. a military tribunal, perhaps being sent to guantanamo. in any case the obama administration has shown absolutely no interest in that idea and every indication is that he will be tried as a criminal defendant in an american criminal courtroom. >> lindsey graham who himself is a military attorney, has spent 30 years in the u.s. air force, he insists he wants tsarnaev to be tried in american civilian court, but that didn't preclude at least for now naming him an enemy combatant to try to question him to see if there are other bombs out there, other individuals who may be involved. sort of this imminent threat notion. is he on sound legal ground, lindsey graham, when he says, yes, he'll go before a civil trial, but at least for now name him an enemy combatant so he can be questioned? >> well, the obama administration has established a policy of a so-called public safety exception to the miranda rule where for some period of
/11. well, senator lindsey graham has been outspoken on how the younger suspect ought to be handled by authorities. here's senator graham. >> two things should happen. when the public safety exception expires, and it will here soon, this man, in my view, should be designated as a potential enemy combatant, and we should be allowed to question him for intelligence-gathering purposes to find out about future attacks and terrorist organizations that may exist. >> mike: there's a part of me that really wants to agree with the senator. he's my friend, and i like him a lot, but if he's asking us to ar understanding of the due process of law that has established us as a unique light among the darkness in this world, then i have to think through that very carefully. yes, i want to be able to question these guys. no, i don't want them to get all lawyered-up. but at the same time we're a country of laws. i do want our country to acknowledge terrorism when it's obvious terrorism. for example, i want us to say, fort hood, that was terrorism. little rock, the shooting of the soldier outside the
in military commissions. >> michael: even after that announcement, republican senator, lindsey graham just wouldn't let it go and held a press conference to criticize the decision. >> the ability to talk to individuals who may know about terrorist organizations plotting our future demise is a long-held concept under the law of war. i'm asking this administration to leave on the table the option if the evidence warrants to designate this individual as an enemy combatant. >> michael: despite his protestations, tsarnaev will be tried as a civilian. the charges against him are very serious. the u.s. attorney charged him with, quote . . . the complaint cites video evidence showing, dzhokhar tsarnaev placing a backpack at the scene and then crossing the street with a cell phone in his left hand. he surveyed the crowd including the 8-year-old boy who died. he takes a picture of the scene holds the phone to his ear, and 18 seconds later the bomb went off. joining us now president and founder of the group terror free tomorrow and the author of the book "terrorists in love." th
to change. >> lindsey graham is doing a whole bunch of talk radio this morning. it's clear to me, we know why they probably booked all these interviews. because they're worried that this is where the immigration issue could percolate where all of the sudden the connection to boston happens. >> i think it also shows that compared to the last time around in '06 and '07 the republicans who were for this type of legislation are a lot more active in trying to engage with the conservative critics. >> dan, that does seem to be a huge difference before, they would lament maybe to you in interviews. but they wouldn't actively try to fix this. >> yeah. you know, they're pushing forward in a way they weren't before. they're much more confident about the reasons why they're doing this. and they're -- they feel much less defensive about it when they're being criticized by their own people. >> at the press conference amongst the most eloquent were marco rubio. the marco rubio. >> you were there. richard. this was the most fascinating -- >> it's a definition of kumbaya. >> it got those many votes. stick
bell lindsey graham, why isn't he being treated as an enemy combatant? that one to me -- >> what about benghazi? >> shut up. >> stephanie: i'll always have benghazi. it is my terror. no. >> i would never go thirsty again. i'll have another mint julep thank you. >> stephanie: the legal expert i heard this weekend said this is a nonstarter to treat him as enemy combatants. did he a crime on u.s. soil. >> peter king said this. >> i believe -- should be portrayed as enemy combatants. senator mccain, senator graham, senator ayotte, there are so many questions unanswered so many potential links to terrorism here. the battlefield is now in the united states. i believe he is an enemy combatant. ultimately, he will be tried in a civilian court and the statements taken from him cannot be used against him in that trial. right now, the only links we have as much as chechnyan involvement in the islamic movement. are there other conspirators out there? where do they get the radicalization? >> he sounds like pam gellar. might as well grow some gigantic boobs. >> stephanie: run-on sentence please, for
on watching that first-hand. lindsey graham says we need to up our game. we're still at war. now there's the big debate on spending right now. is this the time that to cut homeland security spending or to go after that budget or what is your view on that? because you know for two years now you've been talking about debt and deficit spending. and in this sense it all ties back together. >> well, what's driving our spending and driving our debt is the fact that there are 10,000 baby boomers like me retiring every day. 70,000 this week. 3.5 million this year. social security, medicare, there is no money there in those fund. it has all been spent. people are living longer, accessing medicaid. so the real drivers of the debt primarily are our big entitlement programs that won't survive in their current form unless we make some changes. so it has got, it really has nothing to do with what we call the discretionary spending pot. bill: understood. homeland security spending is not touched? >> we have the sequester because the president won't get serious about solving our big spending problem.
their fingerprints? voters? records? >> let me give a shout-out to marco rubio and john mccain and lindsey graham who aren't backing down. some free advice to the republican party. republican party lost the hispanic vote. if there isn't some effort to reach out for a lot of the people who live in this country you can kiss off any chance, bill, for any foreseeable future -- >> chris: yeah, bill. [ laughter ] let me say on bill's defense he is pro-immigration reform. >> i'm more skeptical of it now than i was six or seven months ago for this reason, with all due respect. let's have serious public policy arguments about this and begin asking how this man who has been reported to the f.b.i. in 2011, went abroad six or seven months came back and had russian passport. and no problem at all. maybe someone should look at that and look at the border security before we move ahead with 880-page immigration bill. >> the bill is based on border security. >> would it help -- >> we should ask these questions and we should maybe have more detailed questions asked for people who come from certain countries, yes. >> w
advocates, republicans, are saying such as lindsey graham are -- we understand, they say, we understand he's going to be tried in civilian court but start the questioning -- treat him as an enemy combatant under the law of war. question him by intelligence people. get all the intel you can. then turn him over to the civ civilian authorities. that's what they advocate. that's not going to happen, the administration has decided. he'll be questioned first by this special group set up in the last couple of years in terror cases called the high value detainee interrogation group, fbi cia, dod. they don't have a long time to do that, probably no more than a day or so. then he'll be begin his miranda warning and we'll see if he continues to talk. in other terrorism cases, surprisingly, these people do keep talking. >> mike rogers, chairman, do you have a view how he should be treated in the criminal justice system? >> he's a citizen of the united states. i think that brings all of those protections of the u.s. constitution under the public safety exception, however, i do believe that the fbi has
countries -- cases in this country. today senator lindsey graham urged the white house to reconsider its decision. >> i'm asking this administration to leave on the table the option if the effort warrants to designate this individual as an enemy combatant. the ability to have access to this suspect without a lawyer present together intelligence about a future attack is absolutely essential to our national security. >> democratic congressman adam shift, a member of the house intelligence committee is "outfront" and he is also a former federal prosecutor. we now that dzhokhar, suspect number two, has been read his miranda rights. sow won't be designated as an enemy combatant. but if he was labelled an enemy combatant, he wouldn't have been entitled to a lawyer and a jury trial. they could have asked him a lot of other questions without a lawyer present that may or may not be relevant to national security. now why did they make this decision not to go for enemy combatant status? do they think they have so much evidence in this case that they can go ahead with the civilian jury trial and the
as an enemy combatant. as some republican senators includes lindsey graham called for. senator graham challenged them saying the decision they made premature. let's listen. >> here's my concern. as a lawyer for over 30 years, civilian and military, i strongly support the concept that no criminal defendant should ever be required to incriminate themselves while they're in custody of the government. every nation at war should have the ability to defend themselves by gathering intelligence. these are not mutually exclusive concepts. i believe our nation is at war. the enemy is radical islam defined as the taliban, al qaeda, and affiliated groups. the question i have regarding this case, is there any association between these two individuals and the groups i just named, to allow enemy combatant status to be conferred upon the suspect in boston? >> let's drill down on the legal status of the boston bombing suspect. kendall coffey. the great jonathan turley, here in washington. thank you for this. can they decide later if a piece of evidence shows up a week from now, that shows a connection
. lindsey graham has said there are two possible ways that the fbi dropped the ball on this. first, it could have been a systemic failure in the sense that the procedures were following up on these warnings were floored or secondly there was some individual floor related to this. >> briefly, because you have said that, look, despite the fact that this may now have russia sort of saying, look, we tried to warn the u.s., look at that relationship between russia and chechnya, just because the u.s. and russia have to communicate about this issue, that it could help relations between these two countries. >> that's something we can see going forward. u.s.-russian relations have been terrible the last few years. a travel ban and asset freeze on senior russian officials and the russians retaliated with a sisir ban on u.s. officials linked with guantanamo bay. >> and he's u.s. adoptions. >> u.s. adoptions, exactly. there's indications that relations could be warming and is we have the winter olympics next year in sochi. >> we'll need a lot of international cooperation on security, as well. >> exactly
's some talk in washington, senator lindsey graham among others, saying that he should be treated as an enemy combatant, at least for a time, to get as much information as they can during the investigation. what's your feeling on that? >> well, i think, first of all, you need the right facts in order to be able to charge that. the federal government is still determining what was the motive of these two young men. are they connected to anybody else? until they do that work, until we finish this investigation, that question may even be premature, unless you have a basis for it. i do think that the federal government has had a good track record in civil cases here, understanding what forum people should be in in order to get the best information. but i think we have to be confident. i am, having worked with them this week, is that they're focused on getting information they need to bring the appropriate charges. they can always be updated. and i think that they will make the right decision based upon what they know about this investigation. >> we heard from the boston police commissi
, or was this a conspiracy. that's where our focus is right now. >> i want to play for you what republican senator lindsey graham said after the white house announced earlier in the day that the survivining suspec the 19-year-old, would not be questioned as an enemy combat t combatant. listen to this. >> i'm asking this administration to leave on the table the option, if the evidence warrants, to designate this individual as an enemy combatant. what do we know? we know that these two individuals embrace radical islamist thought, that there's ample evidence this was an attack inspired by radical ideology, they were not trying to rob a bank in boston. >> what do you think about that, congressman? >> well, fifrst thing, i respec the senator's point of view, but i disagree. number one, you have to look at the legal aspect of this. when that provision that you don't have to give miranda rights is used, that -- you have to show a connection to al qaeda. in this situation, we at this point have no connection to al qaeda whatsoever. so the other issue is, this is an american citizen. when you have an american ci
Search Results 0 to 18 of about 19 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)